Vance Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 14 hours ago, Russell C McGregor said: Call for references, please. Who used that phrase and where? Because at no time in my lifetime has the Church denied that Joseph practiced plural marriage. At.No.Time. Mine neither!!!
Jim Stiles Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 9 minutes ago, cdowis said: Christ disagrees with you. John 17:19-23 (see Rom 8:17) Revelation 3:21 You need to understand that we are Bible believing Christians and we accept ALL of the Word of God, including the Bible and modern revelation. PS You are not an antiMormon but only someone who is ignorant of what the Bible teaches. Quote Romans 4:1-8 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness. Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin. Nobody is denying that the sanctification of believers (John 17, etc.,). I am just not confusing justification with sanctification. There is no modern revelation.
Jim Stiles Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 6 hours ago, Stargazer said: Why? Because you disagree with TSS? If I had a two containers that were each 1 cubic foot, and I filled one with solid, molten gold, and the other with variously sized nuggets of gold, they would not weigh the same. The plates were metal pounded into thin sheets and stacked. How thin were they? How flat were they pounded? How many pages did they have? We don't know, you don't know, and nobody knows. It is virtually impossible to make a decent calculation of how much the plates weighed when most of the important factors are unknown. We can make reasonable guesses, but that's about it. Another matter which has been brought up is that the gold of the plates need not and probably were not pure gold, but gold alloyed with another metal, probably copper, to enhance the strength of the material. This would also factor in to the weight of the plates. You can make your own set of plates out of lead and prove McKeever wrong.
UtahTexan Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 52 minutes ago, Jim Stiles said: The important issue is not works or grace. The answer to that question has been documented elsewhere to death. The important issue is human beings becoming Gods to begin with. No human being who has ever lived or will ever live will ever become a God. There is one Triune God. Even glorified man will never be a God; he will only reflect God's glory. Really? Are you saying Works are not important? And are you saying that when we are called Hiers of God and Children of God....the Bible is lying? And since you are being Biblical, please provide the chapter and verse where the word Triune is mentioned please...... 2
RevTestament Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 52 minutes ago, Jim Stiles said: 52 minutes ago, Jim Stiles said: The important issue is not works or grace. The answer to that question has been documented elsewhere to death. The important issue is human beings becoming Gods to begin with. No human being who has ever lived or will ever live will ever become a God. There is one Triune God. Even glorified man will never be a God; he will only reflect God's glory. 47 minutes ago, RevTestament said: Hmm. Better erase that verse out of your Bible where the man Jesus, will be called the everlasting Father. Isa 9:6. I'll keep it in mine. I should also say that verse directly says this Son shall be called El Gibbor or the Mighty God. In Bible parlance that is different from being Elohim or the House/Family of immovable force - something Jesus said of the Pharisees in John quoting Ps 82 while emphasizing the law cannot be broken.
Vance Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 9 hours ago, Jim Stiles said: I was mostly talking about Fawn Brodie's book. But there is a practice in the LDS church of hiding certain doctrines and past practices from new converts and outsiders. The cartoon from Ed Decker's first movie has been described as Anti-mormon propaganda by some Mormons, but is essentially the truth. Heck, Gordon Hinckley told a fib about the Lorenzo Snow couplet on national television. It is crap like this that gets you called an Anti-Mormon. 1
Stargazer Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 8 minutes ago, Jim Stiles said: You can make your own set of plates out of lead and prove McKeever wrong. Don't need to. I know very well that McKeever uses the best dimensions and characteristics he can come up with for exaggerating the weight of the plates, and thus showing that Joseph couldn't possibly have lifted them and carried them as he described. Problem is, it is entirely possible to come up with perfectly reasonable dimensions and characteristics to show the opposite. Besides, lead does not have the right characteristics for the purpose. To start with, it's too soft. 1
Okrahomer Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 20 minutes ago, Jim Stiles said: You can make your own set of plates out of lead and prove McKeever wrong. The Journal of Book of Mormon Studies states (as quoted on FAIR Mormon): Were the Book of Mormon plates pure gold, or were they made from an alloy that looked like gold? The most serious investigation of this question was done 45 years ago by Read H. Putnam of Evanston, Wyoming, a blacksmith and metallurgist. [1] Working first from the general dimensions of the set of plates as reported by eyewitnesses, he calculated that a block of pure gold of that size would have weighed a little over 200 pounds. A number of witnesses, however, put the weight of the set at about 60 pounds. The discrepancy can be partly accounted for by the fact that the leaves must have been handcrafted, presumably by hammering, and irregularities in flatness would have left air space between the plates. This led Putnam to surmise that the entire set of plates would have weighed probably less than 50 percent of the weight of a solid block of the metal. Because the weight of a metal depends on its purity, we must also consider whether the plates were of pure gold. The Nephites were aware of purity distinctions and alloys. We know, for example, that the "brass" plates were of an alloy (quite surely bronze, a copper-tin mixture) [2] and that the plates of Ether were specifically distinguished as being of "pure" gold (Mosiah 8:9). Furthermore, Nephi taught his associates "to work in all manner of" metals and "precious ores" (2 Nephi 5:15). Yet nowhere does the text say that the Nephites' plates were of pure gold. Joseph Smith's brother William specifically said that the material of the plates was "a mixture of gold and copper." [3] (Someone must have provided an objective basis for that statement, for the natural assumption would have been that the plates were pure gold.) The cautious statements by other witnesses, including Joseph Smith himself, who spoke of the plates as having "the appearance of gold," suggest that the metal may have been an alloy. [4] Putnam observed that the only two colored metals from antiquity were gold and copper. An alloy of those two elements was called "tumbaga" by the Spaniards and was in common use in ancient tropical America for manufacturing precious objects. Putnam put forward the reasonable hypothesis that metal plates made in Mormon's day were of that material (the earliest Mesoamerican archaeological specimen of tumbaga—made from a hammered metal sheet—dates to the same century, the fifth century AD, when Moroni hid up the plates he had in his possession).[5] If Mormon's Book of Mormon plates were made of tumbaga, their weight would have been much less than had they been made of pure gold.[3] Putnam made that point in mathematical detail and concluded that the total weight of the plates in Joseph Smith's charge would have been near the 60-pound figure reported by several witnesses. It is of interest that tumbaga was commonly gilded by applying citric acid to the surface. The resulting chemical reaction eliminated copper atoms from the outer .0006 inch of the surface, leaving a microscopic layer of 23-carat gold that made the object look like it was wholly gold. [6] Plates having "the appearance of gold," then, are exactly what we would expect if they were made of tumbaga.[7] [Footnote markers have been left in; references are available on the original site, see footnote.][4] http://en.fairmormon.org/Book_of_Mormon/Anachronisms/Gold_plates
Vance Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 10 hours ago, Jim Stiles said: Smith said (http://www.centerplace.org/history/ts/v3n09.htm): 7 * 8 * 6 / 123 = 0.1944444 ft3 0.1944444 ft3 * 19.30 g/cm3 * 62.4 (lbs/ft3)/(g/cm3) = 234.2 lbs You didn't state your assumptions. 1. You are assuming that "nearly 6 inches" is exactly 6 inches. => a False assumption. 2. You are assuming that the plates weren't plates stacked upon each other with gaps between them but rather solid. => a False assumption. 3. You are assuming that the plates were made of pure gold. => a False assumption. Your calculations are misleading at best and dishonest at less than best.
Bobbieaware Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 25 minutes ago, Jim Stiles said: The important issue is not works or grace. The answer to that question has been documented elsewhere to death. The important issue is human beings becoming Gods to begin with. No human being who has ever lived or will ever live will ever become a God. There is one Triune God. Even glorified man will never be a God; he will only reflect God's glory. The Apostle John testifies the exalted sons of God will become joint heirs with Christ and that they will inherit ALL things he himself possesses (which includes the right to rule and reign as heavenly kings while seated upon the most holy throne of God's own eternal power). In what way will such beings be unlike the God who justifies and sanctifies them? In what way will they not be one with the Father and the Son? It's unimaginable that God would allow men to rule on the throne of his own divine power unless they were fully worthy and capable of doing what he does. The Savior promised his followers that with God all things are possible and that they would do greater works than he had done -- we Latter-day Saints take him at his word. 1
Calm Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 Steve, back when I was an obsessive compulsive moderator instead of just an obsessive compulsive poster, I was saving archives and compiling indexes for them so we won't lose threads when they maxed out at 20 pages or so. Thankfully Richard Abanes' visits were relatively early in that effort so they were one I indexed. See here: http://pacumenispages.yuku.com/topic/3314/RT-II-Index#.VwxbcWt5mSM The pages they are listed on should be relatively close there there was some movement. Do a seach on "abanes" and the threads come up. I marked the various threads that were focused on discussing his book, etc. because many were curious about him. I can't remember when he actually joined the conversation there and will need to go see if his posts can be identified since the purchase by yuku wiped out many poster names. When I was moderating/administrating I usually signed my posts CR, I will have to see if any alias of mine survived. I don't know if his stuff on this board was saved, will do another post on that. 2
Vance Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 8 hours ago, Jim Stiles said: It appears that I have made a mistake. I listened to the entire interview and did not hear any discussion of the Lorenzo Snow couplet. I will get back to you all when I find what I am thinking of. Oh oh. You believed the words of an anti-Mormon without question and got bit for it. You should know by now that you just can't trust those guys. 1
Jim Stiles Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 3 hours ago, CountryBoy said: As a former anti-Mormon, let me add my two cents. One can disagree...or even not believe, in the doctrines of the LDS Church.... But the minute you start posting against the Church and/or the Doctrines...even when couched as innocuous requests for info, you are anti-Mormon. It is dependent on what is in your heart...plain and simple. There is but one God. Three in persons: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. One in essence. The Bible, and only the Bible, is inerrant and infallible. Joseph Smith Jr., Brigham Young, and Thomas S. Monson were not and are not prophets of the Triune God.
Russell C McGregor Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 1 hour ago, Jim Stiles said: The important issue is not works or grace. The answer to that question has been documented elsewhere to death. The important issue is human beings becoming Gods to begin with. No human being who has ever lived or will ever live will ever become a God. There is one Triune God. Even glorified man will never be a God; he will only reflect God's glory. So someone is a liar (that's what "pants on fire" means) because they disagree with your theology??!! How bigoted and arrogant is it possible for one anti-Mormon to be? 2
Jim Stiles Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 1 minute ago, Vance said: Oh oh. You believed the words of an anti-Mormon without question and got bit for it. You should know by now that you just can't trust those guys. I also posted the transcript of a print interview with Hinckley where he said exactly what I remembered him saying.
Jim Stiles Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 7 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said: The Apostle John testifies the exalted sons of God will become joint heirs with Christ and that they will inherit ALL things he himself possesses (which includes the right to rule and reign as heavenly kings while seated upon the most holy throne of God's own eternal power). In what way will such beings be unlike the God who justifies and sanctifies them? In what way will they not be one with the Father and the Son? It's unimaginable that God would allow men to rule on the throne of his own divine power unless they were fully worthy and capable of doing what he does. The Savior promised his followers that with God all things are possible and that they would do greater works than he had done -- we Latter-day Saints take him at his word. That is not in the Bible. Being joint heirs in Christ does not mean that we get to be Gods. That is contradicted in those passages of scripture which affirm monotheism without any qualifications.
Calm Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 Here is what comes up for Richard's profile on this board: http://www.mormondialogue.org/profile/894-rabanes/ 1
Russell C McGregor Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 1 minute ago, Jim Stiles said: That is not in the Bible. Being joint heirs in Christ does not mean that we get to be Gods. That is contradicted in those passages of scripture which affirm monotheism without any qualifications. So being joint heirs with Christ doesn't mean that we get to inherit what He inherits from His Father? What, in your mind, does it mean to be an heir? 2
Storm Rider Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 5 minutes ago, Jim Stiles said: There is but one God. Three in persons: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. One in essence. The Bible, and only the Bible, is inerrant and infallible. Joseph Smith Jr., Brigham Young, and Thomas S. Monson were not and are not prophets of the Triune God. Jim, I have stayed out of this little soap box you have going, but you mentioned that the Bible is inerrant. Is that what you actually mean or was that just hyperbole? Another answer would be helpful; are you a Catholic or an Evangelical? I just want to be clear should I enter into these roiling waters.
Jim Stiles Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 13 minutes ago, Vance said: You didn't state your assumptions. 1. You are assuming that "nearly 6 inches" is exactly 6 inches. => a False assumption. 2. You are assuming that the plates weren't plates stacked upon each other with gaps between them but rather solid. => a False assumption. 3. You are assuming that the plates were made of pure gold. => a False assumption. Your calculations are misleading at best and dishonest at less than best. The leafs have to be thin and numerous enough to record the BOM and other literature that was not translated. I will stick to the 200 lbs estimate because it makes allowances for some loss of weight due to alloying and engraving. The plates were not even used in the translation process (peepstone in hat).
UtahTexan Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 10 minutes ago, Jim Stiles said: There is but one God. Three in persons: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. One in essence. The Bible, and only the Bible, is inerrant and infallible. Joseph Smith Jr., Brigham Young, and Thomas S. Monson were not and are not prophets of the Triune God. Ah...so you dodged the work and faith question...you dodged the request for Biblical Evidence regarding "Triune" and you made a statement about Joseph Smith you can't prove. That about sum it up? 1
Jim Stiles Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 23 minutes ago, Vance said: It is crap like this that gets you called an Anti-Mormon. Good.
Calm Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 Steve, I take back the page numbers being close, I think they screwed up the order of the threads at the same time as the names. It might be easiest to google the title of the thread instead. Maybe look at the date it started? Am exploring.
Jim Stiles Posted April 12, 2016 Posted April 12, 2016 32 minutes ago, CountryBoy said: Really? Are you saying Works are not important? And are you saying that when we are called Hiers of God and Children of God....the Bible is lying? And since you are being Biblical, please provide the chapter and verse where the word Triune is mentioned please...... I am not in the habit of repeating myself. Since you are saying that people earn their salvation, then you must agree with that part of the cartoon.
Steve Noel Posted April 12, 2016 Author Posted April 12, 2016 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Storm Rider said: Jim, I have stayed out of this little soap box you have going, but you mentioned that the Bible is inerrant. Is that what you actually mean or was that just hyperbole? Another answer would be helpful; are you a Catholic or an Evangelical? I just want to be clear should I enter into these roiling waters. 14 minutes ago, Jim Stiles said: The leafs have to be thin and numerous enough to record the BOM and other literature that was not translated. I will stick to the 200 lbs estimate because it makes allowances for some loss of weight due to alloying and engraving. The plates were not even used in the translation process (peepstone in hat). Jim and others, Any chance you can start a new thread for these arguments so that this one can stay on topic? Edited April 12, 2016 by Steve Noel
Recommended Posts